Unbelievable. That was my first reaction to reading Wired Magazine’s new cover story on vaccines and autism that you can read HERE. It’s not a thoughtful look at both sides of the debate. It’s not a piece providing a new spin on a well-known conflict. It’s simply a regurgitation of Paul Offit’s talking points that he’s been dishing out to the uninformed media now for years. Ms. Wallace didn’t just drink Offit’s Kool-aid, shit, she scooped the Kool-Aid out of the rusty old bucket to make enough for everyone!

The article is so misguided, one-sided, lacking in basic research, and ultimately useless, I found myself yearning for Gardiner Harris, Anahad O’Connor, or some of the other Vaccine Patriots (HERE) at the New York Times to spew out something new – at least their stories have the occasional original thought.

Ms. Wallace appears to have gone exclusively to Google University to research her feeble attempt at describing a very complex topic. Aside from a low-profile visit to Autism One, it seems Ms. Wallace never actually bothered to interview anyone from our side of the fence, perhaps she was simply too busy hanging out at Paul Offit’s Rotateq-funded mansion? Did you get a call or an email? I sure didn’t. Ms. Wallace, I would have welcomed you to spend a day at my house with my son to get, I don’t know, maybe a different take on the topic?

I grow so weary of pointing out the same logical fallacies, misstatements, and outright factual errors that many journalists make when covering this debate, it’s going to be a struggle for my stamina to analyze her tripe in detail. To save us all some time, I’ve decided to offer up her “Top 10 blazingly untrue passages” for you to enjoy, along with some comments -- feel free to add a few more of your own.

1. “To be clear, there is no credible evidence to indicate that any of this is true. None. Twelve epidemiological studies have found no data that links the MMR (measles/mumps/rubella) vaccine to autism; six studies have found no trace of an association between thimerosal (a preservative containing ethylmercury that was used in vaccines until 2001) and autism, and three other studies have found no indication that thimerosal causes even subtle neurological problems.”

Comment: This is the #1 sign that a journalist is totally ignorant. What about the 34 vaccines that HAVE NOT been studied? The 50+ ingredients that no one has considered? Giving six vaccines in 15 minutes? Anyone? Bueller? It’s why the website 14 Studies was created. If you start with a belief that the “science has spoken”, you’re wrong from the get-go. (Note to Amy: did you Google Bernadine Healy? I heard she does interviews.) For a much longer rebuttal, please read “Feeding the Hungry Lie” HERE.

2. “The risk of dying from the pertussis vaccine, by contrast, is practically nonexistent — in fact, no study has linked DTaP (the three-in-one immunization that protects against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis) to death in children. Nobody in the pro-vaccine camp asserts that vaccines are risk-free, but the risks are minute in comparison to the alternative.”

Comment: Wow, did you ever go to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program website? It’s hosted by our lovely government. It shows 792 claims of death from DTaP vaccine, and more than 1,200 claims of injury from DTaP where an award was paid by the government. You can read it all HERE. Is that your definition of “nonexistent”? Unbelievable!

3. “Counterintuitively, higher rates of non-vaccination often correspond with higher levels of education and wealth”

Comment: It’s only counterintuitive if you think vaccines are great, never cause injury, and that the science has spoken. Most people, hearing that rich, well-educated people vaccinate less, would stop and figure out why! Maybe with their brains, education, and free time, they know something you don’t seem to get?

4. “As a result, Offit has become the main target of a grassroots movement that opposes the systematic vaccination of children and the laws that require it.”

Comment: The main targets of our movement are the CDC, AAP, and vaccine makers. Offit is an annoying sideshow, nothing more. He’s annoying because of articles like yours. He didn’t cause my son’s autism, and he has nothing to do with my son’s recovery. Offit actually has proven to be quite helpful – he’s the poster boy for the other side, which means his faults become the other side’s faults.

5. “The doubters and deniers are empowered by the Internet (online, nobody knows you’re not a doctor) and helped by the mainstream media, which has an interest in pumping up bad science to create a “debate” where there should be none.”

6. “Looking back over human history, rationality has been the anomaly. Being rational takes work, education, and a sober determination to avoid making hasty inferences, even when they appear to make perfect sense. Much like infectious diseases themselves — beaten back by decades of effort to vaccinate the populace — the irrational lingers just below the surface, waiting for us to let down our guard.”

Comment: Pot, meet kettle. Why are you boring readers with misguided psychobabble? You could have used this time to read some of the science on our side of the fence which is also peer-reviewed! Clean water, toilets, and refrigerators eradicated disease, or at least 98% of it, I’ll give vaccines credit for the final 2% -- and a whole lotta’ autism, allergies, and other demylenating illnesses.

7. “Today, because the looming risk of childhood death is out of sight, it is also largely out of mind, leading a growing number of Americans to worry about what is in fact a much lesser risk: the ill effects of vaccines.”

Comment: If 1 in 100 kids have vaccine-induced autism, this may challenge your conclusion about “low-risk,” unless you like those odds. Few parents do, and your article is unlikely to change that.

8. “The so-called epidemic, researchers assert, is the result of improved diagnosis, which has identified as autistic many kids who once might have been labeled mentally retarded or just plain slow.”

Comment: Please. Help. Me. Can’t. Breathe. Um, which researchers did you talk to? As I stated very recently, what you are saying here is 96.7% impossible (HERE), and always will be.

9. “In fact, the growing body of science indicates that the autistic spectrum — which may well turn out to encompass several discrete conditions — may largely be genetic in origin.”

Comment: Mark Blaxill, I need you, man, I really can’t take it anymore! (Read: Autism and Genetics: What We’ve Got Here is a Failure to ReplicateHERE.) 10. “Then, he came up with a rough estimate: a person could handle 100,000 vaccines — or up to 10,000 vaccines at once. Currently the most vaccines children receive at any one time is five. He also published his findings in Pediatrics. Soon, the number was attached to Offit like a scarlet letter. “The 100,000 number makes me sound like a madman. Because that’s the image: 100,000 shots sticking out of you. It’s an awful image,” Offit says. “Many people — including people who are on my side — have criticized me for that. But I was naive. In that article, I was being asked the question and that is the answer to the question.”

Comment: OK, this last one wasn’t an error by Ms. Wallace, it was just a quote from Offit, but for God’s sake why do they still talk to this guy? If you had 100,000 doctors in a room, and you asked them what would happen to a baby if you gave that many shots, 99,999 would say every single child would immediately die, and well before the 100,0000th vaccine! Makes you sound like a madman? I know the answer to that question.

Ms. Wallace, no one is all that surprised you wrote a piece that bad. Heck, we’re all kind of used to it. I Oh, and wipe the kool-aid of your upper lip, I heard Dr. Nancy wants to interview you.

Unhappy with her piece? Anything you’d like to correct? You can let Amy Wallace know at ecallawyma@gmail.com.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Thanks, everyone.

It's not that she used my email; I don't mind that. It's the way she used it. She butchered it, took words out of context, and changed the entire meaning of my heartfelt letter to her, completely ignoring the vaccine injury part. She did exactly what I was describing in my email; she ignored us and dismissed our children's reactions as hysterical and desperate.

She is the worst kind of journalist. Maybe she should go write for one of those gossip rags like Star magazine or the Enquirer. Or maybe not....even they have standards.

Craig, thank you for posting the ENTIRE email you sent to the pharmatool. This is an all too familiar story of the serious ramifications that SOME vaccines and/or the combination with other vaccines or some other environmental toxin that caused autism in a normally developing child. She seemed to want to feed the fear in the lazy and ignorant that it is a conspiring evil mass of "anti-vaxers" that want the innocent to suffer some horrible disease, how did the pharmatool put it, oh yeah, "he decided to become the first. In 1977, when he was an intern at the Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, he witnessed the second event that would determine his career path: the death of a little girl from a rotavirus infection (there was, as yet, no vaccine). The child’s mother had been diligent, calling her pediatrician just a few hours after the girl’s fever, vomiting, and diarrhea had begun. Still, by the time the girl was admitted, she was too dehydrated to have an intravenous line inserted. Doctors tried everything to rehydrate her, including sticking a bone marrow needle into her tibia to inject fluids. She died on the table. “I didn’t realize it killed children in the United States,” Offit says, remembering how the girl’s mother, after hearing the terrible news, came into the room and held her daughter’s hand. “That girl’s image was always in my head.”"

Meanwhile, in 2008, Merck’s revenue from RotaTeq was $665 million.

RotaTeq costs a little under $4 a dose to make, according to Offit. Merck has sold a total of more than 24 million doses in the US, most for $69.59 a pop.

“That girl’s image was always in my head.”

“That girl’s image was always in my head.”

“That girl’s image was always in my head.”

“That girl’s image was always in my head.”

“That girl’s image was always in my head.”

Yeah right!

$5 says that story is a lie. There was no girl, there was no heart ache, it's one of those stories (lies) he has told so many times at cocktail parties and speaking engagements he has started believing it.

Oh, I'm now officially annoyed at Ms. Wallace. I don't mind her using my email in her story, but using it in such an out-of-context way that clearly demonstrates her bias is unforgivable. On her blog, she lists some of the reactions she received. Here is a sample:

"From a father who disliked the story, a wrenching illustration of why it’s so vital that research dollars not be wasted. People need help:

“My son was born in 2001. He was diagnosed with Autistic Disorder at 26 months. He is 8 years old now and still in diapers. We have to lock the doors, and I have to sleep in front of the front door in case he gets up and tries to leave (he loves to wander). His rages are sometimes so violent that we have to force his sisters to leave the room in case he tries to attack them.
He can, in the throes of his anger, lift his 6′4″, 230 lb father off of the floor,”

says this dad, who is sure that the MMR and DTap vaccines caused his son’s suffering.

“There is no other explanation.”

Until there IS another explanation, vaccines will b falsely vilified."

Not falsely vilified!! Not falsely vilified!!! Did you write in there WHY it said there was no explanation, Ms. Wallace? Good thing I save my emails. Here is the complete and unbutchered version of the email I sent her.

"It took me a while to formulate this email because I don't want to come across as hostile. To say that I am disappointed in your article is a bit of an understatement, but I'm willing to engage you diplomatically in the hopes that you will understand where many parents like myself are coming from.

The reason why there is so much anger from parents who share my views is that we are tired of being ignored. Vaccine injuries do happen, and quite probably much more often than the CDC and Offit admit. Only 10% of all doctors report to VAERS, and most of the CDC's prevalence data about how often reactions occur are gleaned from VAERS. Scientists like Offit and many others like to paint parents like me as desperate. I've been called ignorant, stupid, liar, and all manner of horrible names because of my views. I'm a long way from being an idiot. But more of that later, because it ties into a later point.

Here's my story. My son was born in 2001. By the time he was 18 months old, he was bright, happy, funny. He could walk, spoke about 30 words, and was exceeding all developmental milestones. His final words to me were, "Go Bye Bye!" on the day of his 18 month checkup. That day, he received the MMR and DTaP vaccines. That night, he began running a very high fever, was screaming these horrible, agonizing screams that raised the hair on my neck, arched his back and was completely unconsolable. My wife and I called his pediatrician, who proceeded to tell us that my son's reaction was "perfectly normal." Really?!?! Perfectly normal MY ASS!!! We brought him to the ER soon after. They performed numerous tests and, after doing a CT scan of my son's head, they were able to determine that he had neuroinflamation, or an encepalopathy.

The next day, he was listless. He hasn't spoken but maybe 5 words since. He lost the ability to walk until he was almost 3 years old. He was diagnosed with Autistic Disorder at 26 months. He is 8 years old now and still in diapers. We have to lock the doors, and I have to sleep in front of the front door in case he gets up and tries to leave (he loves to wander). His rages are sometimes so violent that we have to force his sisters to leave the room in case he tries to attack them. His rages can be so violent that he can, in the throes of his anger, lift his 6'4", 230 lb father off of the floor. This is what parents like me have to deal with EVERY DAY!! This is what our life is like. There is no other explaination for his brain damage. But, doctors and Offit and, apparently, journalists like you, try to pawn it off as coincidence. They say that I confuse correlation with causation. Coincidence can't happen so often. So many parents cannot be wrong about seeing their children spiral into illness and neurological dysfunction so soon after a vaccine. But, to Offit and others, the only way they would say that it is a causal factor is if it were to happen when the needle was still in the arm of the child.

The reason I am disappointed in your article is that you spoke with so-called "experts" concerning this condition without looking at their background. Offit is biased; he was reprimanded by congress for his conflicts of interest in vaccine policy making. Here is someone who says that a newborn baby can handle 100,000 vaccines at once. The scientists you spoke to are biased. To them, my son does not exist. To them, children like Hannah Poling and Bailey Banks (2 children who were awarded by the government for iatrogenic autism) do not exist. How can anyone trust them at face value? These are people who's livelihoods rest on the success of the vaccination program. That is known as a Conflict of Interest. A truly objective journalist would have done what they could to address all sides of the problem and investigate who they were talking to.

Now, on to the threats. Everyone, on all sides of the issue, have received threats. I've had CPS called on me, because, apparently, I haven't vaccinated my children. Someone called the school that my youngest daughter goes to and asked them to investigate her vaccine status. Out of 400 children, only she was singled out because she had not received the MMR (I didn't feel it was necessary...she got both measles and the mumps as a baby, and I had her vaccinated for rubella). Painting Offit as a saint for speaking out against us dangerous and unhinged parents is a bit hypocritical considering that he and people like him do the same thing to people like us.

Please don't take it that I am angry at you; I'm not. I'm angry at the situation. I'm angry that doctors, instead of listening to their patients and asking, "what can I do to help?" paint parents with vaccine injured children as crazy, dangerous, ignorant and desperate sociopaths who are endangering everyone else around them. I have vaccinated my children. I encourage others to vaccinate. But when I question vaccine safety, or rather the lack thereof, I'm called "anti-vax" by people like you.

Tell me, how am I anti-vaccine? How am I endangering other people by encouraging them to read up on vaccine injuries. How am I endangering them by giving them as much information as possible in the hopes that their children will not have the same reaction as my son?

The true dangers to society are the individuals who put profit above the health and well-being of those they are sworn to help. All you have to do is look at the track record of companies like Merck, GSK, Bayer, or any of the Pharmaceutical companies, to see that my statement is true. My hope is that you further investigate, go further down the rabbit-hole, and see what you find.

Please be a responsible journalist.

Sincerely,
Craig Willoughby"

This woman is obviously biased. She doesn't want to post the portion that explains WHY I'm sure that the vaccine caused my son's brain damage and the evidence behind it. Why? Because it doesn't support her nice, safe little myopic world. I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, but her article is shoddy journalism at its worst.

Ms. Wallace posted on her twitter account that I sent her an email with a headline entitled, "Paul Offit Rapes (Intellectually) Amy Wallace and Wired Magazine". My many colorful enemies are having fun with this, and avoiding the substance of my issues with her piece.

Here's the story, once and only once:

I often write and then re-write pieces. When I first wrote the piece about Ms. Wallace's Wired article, which I wrote right after reading that horrible piece of shit, here is how it began:

Paul Offit Rapes (intellectually) Amy Wallace and Wired Magazine

By J.B. Handley

"The roofie cocktails at Paul Offit’s house must be damn good, I really don’t know how else to explain the intellectual rape that lead to the writing and printing of Wired magazine’s cover story on vaccines and autism that you can now read HERE..."

I was so amazed with the article. As a student of Paul Offit's talking points for years, it was as if he had put his brain inside Ms. Wallace head and written the piece for her. As is often the case, I forwarded my essay, via email in advance, to Ms. Wallace the night before it ran.

With some reflection, I decided that although "intellectual rape", a relatively commonly used term, and "sexual rape" were very different things, the use of the word "rape" was ultimately in poor taste, would distract from the article, and would most certainly offend some readers, and could appear demeaning of women, which wasn't remotely the intention of the piece or my words. So, I changed the article to the one you all have read, and then AoA ran it the next day. And, I sent Ms. Wallace, via email, the new piece.

The only reason you are reading about a non-published draft of my essay is because Ms. Wallace chose to write about it. That's certainly her right, and it's certainly my mistake, in my fury over her horrible article, for sending it to her in the first place before I had time to reflect. But, she appears to be using these two words, intellectual rape, as a means to avoid having to address the substance of all the lies she told in her article.

For that reason, I will continue to hound Ms. Wallace for the untrue, wildly biased, unsupportable piece of shit she allowed to be published with her name at the top. If I offended any AoA readers with my unpublished draft, please know that it offended me, too, I changed it, and I apologize to all of you.

Brian, you're neglecting to connect the dots of media. If your Grandma wants to read a romantic story, she picks up a Harlequin Romance, not Penthouse, right? Both contain steamy scenes but you could hardly compare the two. Age of Autism has a target audience and an editorial direction. JB wrote a perfect piece for us designed to make people think and understand the issues we parents of vaccine injured children face.

@sarahsam @Theresa O: In regards to the comments in which you suggested that I claimed that I believe that the arguments made in this article were false, I made no such accusation. The only thing that I commented on was the writing style in this article, and this article alone. I did not discuss the writing style of 14studies.org, nor any other source. Rather, I believe that 14studies.org, overall, is written in a much better style than this is.

@sarahsam: I did not once dismiss any argument that was put forth in this article, the Wired article, or any other source. Not once. As I mentioned, I lack the knowledge required to make such an argument, and do not pretend to do so. You say that I find fault with his critique, which is simply not true; I do not agree with the method in which the author tries to convey his arguments.

@Theresa O: I did visit each site that was referenced. Although I only had the time to quickly peruse the sources, those sites and others are in my queue for more detailed reading.

I find it amazing that Tim and Brian find fault with J.B's critique of what is clearly a completely devoid of substance hit piece that completely miss characterizes the entire vaccine safety issue but do not seem to have any problem with the idiotic hit piece itself-and all the while admitting they are not up to speed on the issue! Amazing!

Ben, Robert, Tim, Brian... I think there are a couple of things going on here. One thing is that some of you didn't bother to click through JB's links. If you did, then you'd see plenty of evidence to support the points that JB makes in his article. The other thing is that you don't like JB's style. Maybe you don't like the style of some of the HuffPo bloggers, or you didn't like William F. Buckley's style. Whatever--that's your right. However, if you saw the last line in this entry (where JB says he's the founder of Generation Rescue), and if you clicked through to the 14studies.org website (which says that it's run by Generation Rescue), then you can see that JB is a thoughtful guy who knows how to do research and to construct an argument--a guy who also writes "ruckus-style" entries for Age of Autism. A lot of parents need a dose of JB as an antidote to the message being broadcast by the mainstream media--in a voice of calm, to be sure, but full of the lies and half-truths that JB exposes in entries like this one.

In regards to Tim C's comment, I find it a little unnerving that he has been hit with so much criticism. He clearly stated that he lacks the required knowledge to make an informed decision, and he was only commenting on the writing style. He specifically said, and I quote, "Now I need to do more reading/studying/thinking about this issue".

I side with him for the simple reason that the writing and website style do not portray a writer who has enough adequate knowledge to be able to write an unbiased view on this subject. Before I get bashed for this, let me make it perfectly clear that I am not suggesting in any way that the author does not have the requisite knowledge for this; I am merely stating, like Tim C, that the writing style lacks professionalism. Unfortunately for the author, this takes away from what credibility this author has. Had the article been written more professionally and with a calmer tone (although I sympathize with why the author lacks one), I firmly believe that it would be paid more attention to.

From the way I understand Tim C's comment, he is merely suggesting that this article might receive more attention had it been written in a more professional matter. Unfortunately, the author does not help by telling Tim to "Put [it] in your sociological pipe and smoke it": hardly an unbiased way of putting it.

Like Tim, I also lack knowledge on this subject, and I also plan on doing some research on it now. I believe, however, that just because a medical professional is questioning current research does not necessarily mean that he is "against" anybody. Debate by professionals in the field is essential to ensuring that the correct knowledge is procured, and it should not be dismissed until proper evidence is given. If both sides have evidence supporting conflicting results, then there is cause for more research in that particular area. To put things in a relative perspective, I have a chronic disease that afflicts me every day. When two doctors who practice the focus of my disease have conflicting views and are willing to support their claims, I welcome it, for the simple reason that, if both sides are being rational, the correct results will come out on top, which means that they might come closer to finding a cure for me.

I just got an email from Wired, apparently she has been tweeting the responses as well.

Hello,

Your letter to Amy Wallace was forwarded to Wired's Rants department. We'd like to consider your letter for publication, but in order to do so, we need your full name, day time phone number (for verification purposes only), and the city and state, province, or country where you live.

I think its absolutely absurd to dispute a parent's claim that their child has been affected by vaccines. We really need to re-think this "one size fits all" approach to medicine and stop demonizing the parents who question it.

Your writing style is completely disrespectful and unprofessional. It seems like you'd want to add some creedence to your ideas by refuting the arguement rather than attack the author. Obviously, since you have no evidence to successfully defend your stance you have little other choice than to call her an idiot. The minimal evidence provided doesn't actually speak directly to your any of the points you hope to support. Too bad your side of the "debate" doesn't have someone who can construct a successful arguement.

Tim- Suggested reading would be the Simpsonwood meeting and the fourteen studies. The government knows there is a problem and they want it covered up. We didn't have all of these problems until the government started insuring the vaccine industry.

How can I predict this? Look at our model again: the vaccine compensation system. We forfeited the free market forces that had provided us with leverage, in exchange for government promises. By accepting the bargain----government compensation----we gave government the legitimacy to mandate more vaccines. There was no rationale left for parents to refuse vaccination. Government would take care of them. No need for lawyers or lawsuits to prove causation. And government set up vaccine "safety" panels, with a token or two from our ranks. How has that worked out for us?! The leverage that we lost 30 years ago was our independence from government. The freedom to sue vaccine makers. The justification to reject vaccines. The same freedom we are about to give away for Obamacare. A level of faith in government that has never been justified. You, the consumer of medicine have the power of choice when you can vote with your money and the monopoly by providers is ended. I couldn't even pay for an MRI with my own money last month, because no doctor had prescribed it! A procedure without the risks of say, a drug or surgery. The power of choice is the key. Same with vaccine mandates. Pharma fears philosophical exemptions the most. Because it arms us with leverage. They know this! The only ones who don't know this is us. Leverage is necessary to negotiate or rescind vaccine mandates, vaccine ingredients, or mandate provisions. CHOICE-----right to refuse----brings to bear the free market forces to moderate government behavior. The power to refuse induces legislators to refrain from excessive mandates.

Tim C: There's a big difference between being a vaccine safety advocate and and being anti-vaccine.

If more journalists in the mainstream media would stop taking CDC bullet points at face value, fewer children would be injured by vaccines. And fewer parents would be sounding off here at Age of Autism.

My heart just skipped a beat when I saw this headline. My name is also Amy Wallace. I am a mother to a severely affected, vaccine injured, 9 year old with seizures, chronic GI issues, etc. I am also the Director of Operations for Autism York and volunteer numerous hours per week helping other families in our area. We are a true biomed, no longer vaccinating family trying to get our kiddo healthy. We work with some amazing doctors too and I hate that my name is in the same sentence with Paul Offit. Please know this AMY WALLACE is not on the same "kool aid drinking" page as she is.

Once you have gone away and done your "reading/studying/thinking" on this issue, come back and report your findings.

The author of the article is the parent of a vaccine-damaged child. Gosh, now why, oh why, might he sound "shrill and angry"? You state you lack basic familiarty with autism research. JB Handley does not - which is why he is writing the article, and not you.

I am not the least bit concerned if people who have no time, energy or tears invested in this massacre think "it doesn't make you look good."

I also haven't got a clue why you think any of this is related to religious fanaticism. What in the world gave you that impression? Did you just make that up?

I guess Tim doesn't know that we're the ones with the children that got blindsided by someone swinging a 2X4 putting a big dent in the side of these sweet innocent babies heads. One out of every 100 or so of them out there all stunned by that assault, us trying to explain to the cops that someone almost killed our kid and no one believing us. In every single neighborhood in the Country someone is getting away with wacking away at our babies' heads, ruining a majority of them and we aren't supposed to get a little angry when someone says we are full of crap or want to make money or want (and this one really pisses me of) free services for our kids. We were there Tim, we know what happened, we are the witnesses never called to testify, please excuse us for being a tad emotional about our victimized kids.

The tone of this article, and of this website in general, make it much easier to dismiss the anti-vaccine crowd as religious-fanatical wackos.

First, let me make it clear that I lack basic familiarity with autism research. I am a sociology researcher (studying governmental regulation of religion, using cross-national analysis) who has previously worked with individual level data. So I understand statistics, am familiar with the design of research studies, but haven't worked with any medical studies, etc.

Prior to today I had never read anything about the possible relationship between vaccinations and autism; although I was aware that some people believe a causal link exists.

This morning I read the Wired Magazine article about Paul Offit. Clearly it is dismissive of the anti-vaccine crowd, but it does so in a way that sounds straightforward, reasonable, and scientifically-minded.
Wanting to understand some of the arguments of the "other side," I did a google search and found this article.

And I have to say, this article (and this website in general) does not make the anti-vaccine crowd look good. The tone of the writing is shrill, angry, and religious-fanatical. Now, the goal of this website and of this article may be to rally the troops, to psych up the people who already believe in the cause. And that's fine, so far as that goal goes. But it makes y'all look worse to outsiders (like me) who are new to the issue and don't fall on one side or the other. If the tone of this website is representative of the anti-vaccine crowd, I'd find it very easy to dismiss y'all.

In contrast, the "Fourteen Studies" website (another anti-vaccine spot) has a reasonable, scientifically-minded tone. Good for it.
Now I need to do more reading/studying/thinking about this issue.

Now Wired is trying to convince readers that they really, really DID do some research for this story. And by golly, ended up with the thickest folder ever!

How insulting, given that so many parents of children with vaccine-induced autism roll luggage carts full of information to meetings, or have file cabinets stuffed with medical studies and government reports.

I wonder how much information they uncovered using the Freedom Of Information Act....

Wallace, you are a fool, but WIRED is even more misguided by choosing to cover-story this lame, ignorant article. Don't you realize that the "Geeks" you target for readership are often the very population most effected by Paul Offit's vaccine exploitation? And who are insulted most by Wallace's shallow, biased "investigation?"

WIRED, this Geek family is out of here. We terminate our subscription. You covered Amanda Baggs some months ago, then betrayed
that inspiration with a stupid rehash of Offit's self-serving POV.

"In the center of the fray is Paul Offit," states Wallace. Poor ignorant journalist, you may have just destroyed your career. In the center of this fray are the vaccine-injured children of the world. And the "fray" will become known in history as the greatest humanitarian and civil rights violation of the 21st century.

Bensmyson and Rileysmom-- Wallace probably took a page from Al Franken on that one. He used to respond to hate email as though the person had written a fan letter. It drove people crazy, which Franken got a kick out of. In this case, Wallace is about as funny as a tumor and the gag is just weird.

My question is do people like Wallace believe the sh@t they write or is the check from Pharma too big to deny and they simply don't care? Because SURELY anyone with two brain cells to rub together would see how one sided this article is. But people are so "processed" to believe government, believe the AAP, believe whatever Katie Couric tells you to do - I often tell my friends "It isn't until you get burned by Pharma that you wake up."

I was a good little citizen and got my Hep B shots and BAM - my life forever changed. Thank GOD it did though because it brought me to find the autism community who in turn is the reason my daughter is the healthy little girl she is today.
I guess more people need to get burned by Pharma before they WAKE UP.

I am upset with Wired.com, for embedding one of FAIR Autism Media's video clips (showing Larry King interviewing Joe Lieberman). Without any link to our website, they embedded a video to their page served from our webservers... and we were serving up that video 5,000 times or more each day, chewing through bandwidth that we pay for. I broke the link... but next time I'm going to swap the damn thing out with an advertisement!!!

Not only did Ms. Wallace not actively seek out any from our side to interview on the subject, she quite intentionally, deceitfully sought out parents of vaccine injured children with the solitary intention of belittling, embarrassing and misrepresenting them after the fact. I do believe Halloween must have come early this year; a new witch has been ordained into the media matrix of vaccine mantra.

Bob Moffit asked, "If Dr. Offit does not believe these threats are credible...why does he ALWAYS speak of them?"

I have found the same lead in to some profluoridation stories where a fluoridation referendum or controversy is playing out. The profluoridation newspapers will mention that a dead rat was found in the mail box of a profluoridation zealot. (It "may" have happened in Bellingham, Washington) They do this when they anticipate getting clobbered by an "educated" constituency who soundly defeat adding industrial waste to the drinking water.

It boils down to a loss of credibility and now they need sympathy or their mama's shoulder to cry on.

Thanks JB. Keep on writing. It's one of the few places where the truth is printed, respected, and appreciated. Besides, you are really good.

JB - thank you for this. Someone we know in common recently said those on the AoA side of the vaccine issue are just reading "the Internet," which I find to be the most condescending statement of our time (as if we are reading those sites with the interlocking teddy bear backgrounds or as if we are unable to verify facts from multiple reliable sources).

This person then sent me the Wired article which was found ... on the Internet.

I was more than pleased to send this person your excellent tear-down of the Wired article.

This is an extremely eye opening book and very well written. But reading about what our country did to our soldiers in the name of science is very hard. This book also goes into detail about the history of the use of oil based adjuvants in vaccines.

This book is a must read for anyone who wants to understand vaccine research and policy.

I got far enough into Offit's Autism's False Prophets book to see him quote an Eli Lilly study (1929) that said an adult male could take up to 2,000,000 micrograms of thimerosal. It is on page 63. After that, I could not read any more.
I have always found it interesting that with the "proof" being entirely statistical no medical journal has ever published the autism rate among the unvaccinated population. All of the proofs that there is no connection between autism and vaccination neglected to include a measure of the control group, the population that has never been vaccinated. I am in awe. The need for no connection is so powerful that the scientists convinced themselves without looking at the control group statistics.

I found Ms. Wallace's attempt to make the case for the canonization of Offit to be extremely disgusting. Also disgusting was his announcement that he intends to write another book - a history of the "anti-vaccine" movement. He must have considered this article to be a golden opportunity to promote that book (as well as himself).

Ms. Wallace's reference to belief in pseudoscience being "comforting" is almost incomprehensible to me. Since to her, the conclusion that vaccines contributed in no small measure to my daughter's autism (and to that of VERY many others) is pseudoscience, I would ask her just how she thinks I can feel "comforted" by knowing that I held my daughter down for each and every one of her vaccinations? I would find it much more "comforting" to believe that vaccines had nothing to do with my daughter's autism - because that would at least partially exonerate me from having actively contributed to it. Believing that autism was completely genetic would have been much more "comforting".

Ms. Wallace, how many more children suffering adverse reactions to vaccines (including death) will be enough for you to even begin to do research to write a logical, balanced article examining this subject?

This makes no sense: The article says, "In certain parts of the US, vaccination rates have dropped so low that occurrences of some children’s diseases are approaching pre-vaccine levels for the first time ever." She goes on to say that in states w. philosophical exemptions, 2.6 percent of parents opted out, up from 1 percent in 1991, according to the CDC, and that in some communities, non-vaccination rates are approaching 6 percent.

Before vaccines, everyone came down with measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox etc. If vaccines work, how could 1% to 6% opt-out rates result in pre-vaccine numbers of people getting these illnesses?

In 1998 Vanity Fair, another Conde Nast title, published an article by Gary Matsumoto linking Gulf War Syndrome with squalene-containing vaccines given to soldiers. Oh how times have changed. I can't find the article on VF's site but Mr Matsumoto has a book on Amazon "In the Name of Defense" about the same topic.

I remember reading the article and thinking it was convincing, unfortunately it had passed out of my mind 4 years later when my son was born. Now it seems like the cat is out of the bag regarding vaccines and developmental disorders and there's no going back. Hysterical propaganda like this Wired article proves that petty Dr. Mengeles like Offit are feeing the heat.

From Wired: "... the number of reported pertussis cases jumped from 1,000 in 1976 to 26,000 in 2004."

Trying to blame any occurrence of disease on the un-vaccinated is yet another disconnect. While the cases climbed, rates of vaccination have steadily increased over four decades to the point of reaching 99% coverage. With that much participation, the way I see it, the vaccine didn't work, if you are willing to admit to 26,000 cases in 2004. (On a graph, shouldn't those lines intersect, rather than be parallel? I'm just an "educated parent" so maybe I don't know anything.)

From Wired: "In states where such opting out is allowed, 2.6 percent of parents did so last year, up from 1 percent in 1991, according to the CDC."

So the percent of parents opting out of vaccination has almost tripled in less than 20 years? It took 17 years for the un-vaccinators to gain just 1.6%? What are you worried about? Geez.

Parents are told that the second we stop vaccinating, cases will just go through the roof. Where are the horrible epidemics? Too bad they can't blame all those "highly educated" un-vaccinator-parents for the swine flu because it is so new. But give them time.

***I didn't comment on the page but sent Ms Wallace a private msg***
Ms. Wallace,
You didn't even interview anyone else but Offit? This man claims that he is in constant "fear" for his life and if that were even remotely true, there would be police reports and lawsuits. It's a matter of public record when someone files a police report...haven't seen any from Offit. I personally know that it's against the law to file false police reports, so I would assume that's why none exist. The whining baby wants to put his dog in the fight then he better put on his big boy pants and stop making false accusations against parents of children with autism. You even went so far as to mention a friend of mine in your article...Curt Linderman. Funny, you can wish someone would drop dead of a massive heart attack but it doesn't mean you're going to hunt them down and stalk them until they do. Wishing and doing are two different things lady and once again, Offit is painted in the Martar light even though WE sacrificed our children for the greater good. Most of us don't have the time nor energy to waste on Offit. He makes me gag just looking at pictures of him but I don't waste my time with him.
Well, Ms Wallace, you got exactly what you and your "magazine" (I use that term lightly) wanted...attention to boost your readership and rating. How's it feel to be Offit's whore? Maybe you should interview Amanda Peet and ask her how things are going for her since she signed onto the Offit bandwagon. I hear every movie (ok the one she's been in since, X Files) bombed. Ask her how her daughter is after all the vaccines that Mr Offit told her were safe to give. I hear that child is delayed and isn't speaking properly. Ask her if she got the 10,000 or the 100,000 vaccines that Offit says are perfectly safe for children to receive at one time.
I will not dignify you with a comment on your article for the public to see. I wanted to tell you in person how stupid of an article you just wrote. Did you really think this through before you pushed send on the invitation to Offit to interview him? Do you realize that he has been discredited at every step? That people think he's a joke?
I hope this was worth the money you were paid out for this article Ms Wallace. Worth all the children you just stuck a needle in...that blame falls squarely on your shoulders.

I tried registering so I could add a comment of my own to the article, but for some reason - which I can only assume is an "anti-Unix" Windows-led bias against Mac - the little "Join" button wouldn't work for me.

When I read about people spewing garbage like this, I just want to tell them to pray to God that their child is never affected with autism following vaccination. Because then they'll be eating their words and let me tell you, they go down nicely with a huge gulp of regret for what you've done to your child followed by a nice remorse chaser for your complicity in it by holding them down to get their shots.

Wired seems to need ad revenue. What better way then to court big Pharma! Although profits are down a bit they are still the strongest growth businesses out there (especially when you compare to the other Fortune 500's.)

Strainge isn't it that they had layoffs right after this issue hit the press...

J.B. about your comment of "growing weary", please don't. You are insprirational to us all and your willingness to take on these liars is changing the world. Many, many children have been saved from what your son and my grandson have gone through. Don't for a minute think that your words are not reaching and changing minds, because they are. You know why? Because you and the Age of Autism are telling the truth and it is hard for liars to keep up with the truth.
Believe me your efforts are working just keep it up and don't grow weary. Instead rejoice in all of those you have saved and will save from this illness of autism

MY POST... The below is what I posted.... and it was to be number 29 (at least, this is what it looked like while I was waiting for it to be posted). I was so excited when at around 1:40 I saw something time stamped at 1:12 (the actual #29) was deflated when I saw their #30 time stamped at 1:50 pm. Looks like my post didn't pass muster with their moderators, a.k.a., censors.

"All the news that's fit to print" (top left corner of every page A1). HA!

They don't even print THEIR OWN NEWS!

29. October 21, 2009
1:17 pm
Link

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

NYT accepts the possibility of other autoimmune diseases in reaction to vaccines. It must just be autism & vaccines that the NYT has an issue with.

There was one thing in this particularly uniformed article that was worth noting.

The opening paragraphs described the frightening threats Dr. Offit has received:

"To hear his enemies talk, you might think Paul Offit is the most hated man in America...Thousands of people revile Offit publicly at rallies, on Web sites, and in books.....Then there are the threats. Offit once got an email from a Seattle man that read, “I will hang you by your neck until you are dead!” Other bracing messages include “You have blood on your hands” and “Your day of reckoning will come.” A few years ago, a man on the phone ominously told Offit he knew where the doctor’s two children went to school...whenever Offit gets a letter with an unfamiliar return address, he holds the envelope at arm’s length before gingerly tearing it open. “I think about it,” he admits. “Anthrax.”

The author waits SEVEN pages before asking Dr. Offit if he is afraid of those who wish him harm. He responded:

“I’m not that brave,” he says. “If I really thought my life was at risk or my children’s lives were at risk, I wouldn’t do it. Not for a second.”

If Dr. Offit does not believe these threats are credible...why does he ALWAYS speak of them?

Thanks JB. I agree with the earlier comment-- we can almost look forward to these idiotic articles just because of what we know you'll have to say about it.

Like someone just mentioned-- I'm not sure what's in it for Wired. No pharm ads generally. It's owned by Conde Nast. There must be indirect pharma ties. It could even be a hypochondriac editor. In any case, for a few years, they've been on a brainwashing spree, dropping little jokey bits about the supposed heritability of aspergers in every issue as if it were a closed case. This is a rampage-- it's just not clear cui bono.

When I first saw the cover, I was horrified. I couldn't bring myself to actually read the article until I saw some reviews from this commmunity. Oh, ffft, is that all? When I finally did read it, I was laughing. Really stupid, recycled, pretentious-- Offit's greatest hits album; sales bin at Walmart. Tripe is right.

It was particularly hilarious to read how Offit changed his tune about that supposed "assault" (mentioned in another interview) that happened during one of the safer-vax demonstrations. The dad who was actually involved in the incident-- a dad from our community-- recently described the event...he'd merely tugged on Offit's sleeve.

I guess Offit was informed that his b.s. had been publically challenged by the horse's mouth and rethought the initial lie. In Wallace's piece, he's now admitting that someone merely tugged his sleeve, that he knew the guy "didn't mean" to "hurt" him and was simply excited to be in presence of such evil.

Why this incident would even be worth mentioning if it weren't just a way to alter his initial lie is beyond me. And being the rigorous investigative reporter that she is, Wallace made no mention of the earlier account. To even include this bit of information on its own, Wallace must have known that she was on a PR assignment and knew about Offit's initial bs story or else she just printed what she was told without editing because she's a gynoid.

I know the basic readership of these tech mags (Wired has been trying to appeal to a younger and younger crowd in the past few years or at least include them) and this is essentially just old-guy Wired editors forcing their market-defense or ideology or whatever down the throats of readers who generally will have little interest in the vaccine autism debate-- young guys who let other people worry about health issues and who don't get flu shots. And if some readers do think about this stuff, it's because they're too old to take the mag seriously (more t&a ads, more beer ads, more stupid action-comic stories of jewel heists, etc.) and are not vaxing their kids on the recommennded schedule anyway.

I'm sure there are some readers they'll succeed in brainwashing but most will just scratch their heads at the cover and skip the article on Offit altogether.

This whole entire article was simply written as a way to get people to care about WIRED. Um, hello - anyone remember another third-rate, crappy mag called "Cookie" with Amanda Peet calling us parasites? Yeah, they're bankrupt now.

The vaccine-autism "debate" is just a way to drum up readership/interest in the magazine. That's why the ignorant and poorly informed Ms. Wallace couldn't care less if she is factually accurate. Fact is you're talking now about WIRED, which most people besides me and a few other geeks have never even heard of.

I've looked through the mag and much to my amazement there wasn't any pharmaceutical advertisements (except something on Buckley's; really don't know what that was about). This article was so out of place in Wired and seemed like it was an article more likely destined for Cookie. Perhaps it was and perhaps it was already paid for so as a measure of frugality on CN's part since Cookie is done, it was tossed onto the Wired desk; after all it mentioned both Offit and his wife using a computer so I guess that's kinda techy in a really stretchy kinda way.

Why is it, when it comes to vaccines and drugs, Americans are SO willing to ignore the blatant conflict of interests inherent in the whole system?

That question has perplexed me lately - Americans can be quite cynical and conversely innovative in other areas of life. I.e., we can do it "bigger" and/or "better."

Therein, though, lies the problem to some extent (what a surprise - our arrogance is our downfall). Nobody wants to look like they're turning their back on "science." That's something that was done in the Middle Ages - no "smart" people do that. But what happens when the "science" is the most favorable result money can buy?

The good news, despite these frustrating blips on the radar - is that more people are indeed questioning what we are told by big pharma and their shills. I see it in my everyday life and it heartens me for the difficulties ahead. I don't expect pharma to go down without a fight - there's way too much money involved.

Thanks, JB, for taking the time to write this response. As the mother of a child suffering a devastating brain injury from the whole cell pertusis vaccine I was offended in a million different ways by this article. There is simply no forum whatsoever that should allow any writer to be so dismissive and insulting of vaccine injured children and their families. I assume Amy Wallace is young and childless...that's the best I can give her. Perhaps someday she will regret writing this judgemental, inaccurate, and inflammatory piece of trash.

Thank you so much, JB, for your excellent rebuttal to this infuriatingly ignorant piece of claptrap. I just don't understand why so many people fall hook line & sinker for the pharma and agency propaganda.

J.B., to be clear, I mean this in the best possible way. This is a waste of your time and talent. Getting upset over an article in WIRED magazine about vaccines and autism is like getting pissed off at your plumber when he gives you a bad stock tip.

Morons will be morons. In this case, after reading the other drivel at Wired on this subject, shills will be shills. The more we take them to task on their writing, the more relevant their writing becomes. Watch out for that double-edged sword.

thanks for the link, J.B. I gave her a piece of my mind. Mentioned the ESL kids, too. It may be useful for her to know that not only parents of children with autism are concerned about this important issue. Some of us just actually see what's happening and are frustrated/outraged. Thank God, now in Calgary, we have some journalists who are actually doing some real research on the issue and writing some good articles.

I read this and all I can think of is the Merck memo calling a jihad out for all disinters of Vioxx, "destroy them where they live"

Vioxx revenue hit $2.5 billion in 2003, and was one of Merck's biggest drugs. The six month period ending in June of 2009 Merck took in a billion dollars in vaccine revenues. http://biz.yahoo.com/e/090803/mrk10-q.html This means the vaccine business for Merck alone, is a 2 billion dollar a year business.

Exactly how much money is there to destroy those who threaten those billions in revenue? How much would it take to have an article such as the one in Wired published? A million? Remember the game we all played when we were kids, what would you do for a million dollars? Would you kill someone? Obviously some people kill for the thrill but most of us drew the line at murder, but I remember a friend of mine said he'd do it if he wasn't going to get caught. He could live with himself as long as no one knew about it.

A million dollars.

"The magazine has lost 50 percent of its ad pages so far this year, ranking among the worst off of the more than 150 monthly magazines measured by Media Industry Newsletter. Only Portfolio, which Condé Nast shut down last month, and Power and Motoryacht fared worse.

Howard Mittman, Wired’s publisher said that he thought that the March issue, with just 38 advertising pages, was the bottom. He was adding new advertisers in liquor and home furnishings to make up for the pullback in business advertisers, he said. Asked how he would make up the remainder, Mr. Mittman smiled. “I dunno. I mean, pray?” he said.

Remember the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, which was published by Exerpta Medica, a division of scientific publishing juggernaut Elsevier? Remember how it touted Vioxx and Fosamax? Remember Elsevier acknowledged that Merck had sponsored (paid for) the publication, but did not disclose the amount the drug company paid. In a statement emailed to The Scientist, Elsevier said that the company "does not today consider a compilation of reprinted articles a 'Journal'."

The vaccine debate won't go away. H1N1 has brought it to the general public (almost). Debates sell magazines.
Another group profiting from autism and they don't give a shit to do any real reporting.
This 'reporter' is as culpable as any doctor not doing their research. People will drink the Kool Aid that she is passing to them... 1 in 51 coming soon!

Wow! You think I wouldn't be shocked anymore... I know this is exhausting for you J.B., but please know it is a huge relief knowing you are there!! Thanks for your time in this... as far as Wired magazine...WTF?!
They will be hearing from me.

I would love nothing more than to see Dr. Profit--oops, I mean Dr. Offit--appear on television and have someone give him 100,000 vaccines. The timing would be important. If we wait awhile, he can get the new HPV vaccine for males. But if we wait too long, we might run out of the H1N1 vaccine. Any volunteers?

Even more laughable is the sidebar list of talking points entitled "How to Win an Argument About Vaccines." Just a bunch of false assertions with no scientific references. Among other sins and omissions, no mention of the multiplied negative synergy when mercury and aluminum are combined.

I also have written a rebuttal, (since this bimbo, wannabe reporter actually had me in the story. It can be found at my website: www.autismtodayonline.com J.B. thank you for everything you do! It's really time to stop being nice to these buttholes. The post that Wallace talks about in the article was made at this site...so I hope you'll still let me post!

The article in Wired magazine is nothing more than a paid Offit Infomercial. The only thing missing are the (paid) people in the audience nodding their heads oohing and ahhing over his asinine comments.

When I picked up my copy of Wired magazine, my first thought was WTF? Why is Paul Offit in here??????????????? I wonder, did he think getting published in this magazine he'd get to those well educated, wealthy crazed internet parents in a publication they may read ... this is so laughable. Thank you for taking the time to write this post ... it is getting tiresome having to read the same crap over and over ...

JB,
Very much enjoyed reading your post. You are correct that Paul is just a sideshow that further deteriorates the credibility of the public health folks at CDC and NIH. Very good point. In fact, any rational person would see that by not shutting Paul up, they implicitly endorse him.

Oh, good Lord. I can't take these articles any more. The only thing that makes them bearable is the thought that JB Handley will be writing a rebuttal. Thanks again, JB.

I also fail to understand why no one outside the autism community thinks it's weird that Offit gets interviewed again and again about autism. He's not an autism expert! He doesn't study or treat autism! In her rush to talk about how autism is made-up, really regular-old mental retardation, and probably genetic, Amy Wallace didn't bother to talk to anyone who actually studies, say, the effect of mercury on children. She could even have picked Pichichero, if she wanted a pro-vaccine person ... it boggles the mind, how lazy and stupid a "journalist" can be.

Your post was an enjoyable read this morning. These crap articles are so brazenly incorrect and reek of nonsense. There's no science here and that is what Wallace needs in her inbox from us. What a joke!

As far as Offit, ho-hum - business as usual. He will go down in history as a very sick and criminal mind.